What? No Iowa Caucus recap thread?

[ed_jaxon]

I don't want to hear peoples ideologies but I do want to hear view their interpretations of the results.

[trish]

Here's a pretty good analysis->

http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/2012/01/04/iowa-caucus-results/

[flabbybody]

virtual tie in conservative Iowa is decisive defacto win for Romney.
should have an easy time winning nomination now that more moderate states start voting in non-caucus primaries.
after all the hype its Obama-Romney in November, just like we all knew it ultimately would be

[Ben]

Quoting from an article written by Michael Hirsh at the National Journal: "
In truth, Obama and Romney are far closer in mindset and philosophy than anyone is willing to acknowledge just now. Obama, despite his image, has sought to placate business and left Wall Street largely intact (http://www.nationaljournal.com/magazine/vikram-pandit-s-citigroup-growing-out-of-washington-s-control--20110328), and he is taking a far tougher line on foreign policy (http://www.nationaljournal.com/has-the-war-with-iran-already-begun--20111204?page=1)--one that reflects a traditional GOP "realpolitik" view and a dramatic ratcheting up of covert war (http://www.nationaljournal.com/magazine/secret-love-obama-s-budding-romance-with-the-cia-20110511)-- than is generally acknowledged, even when it comes to China (http://www.nationaljournal.com/magazine/obama-s-great-wall-around-china-20111201).
Romney, increasingly desperate to win over his base against the onslaught of "Not-Romneys," has allowed his rhetoric to grow more inflamed on the trail, including commitments to a balanced-budget amendment and partially voucherizing Medicare as well as eliminating Obamacare. But based on his history, if he gets the nomination he is unlikely to follow through fully on these overheated pre-primary pledges and do many things dramatically differently, either on the economy or foreign policy. The problems of slow growth, chronic deficits and an overextended military will inevitably lend themselves to similar solutions from either an Obama or a Romney administration.
So let the general begin already. And let’s not deceive ourselves over what it’s about: power far more than principle."
I mean, the whole thing is meaningless. Romney wins. Why? He's the richest and he's got the backing of Wall Street. (I want Paul to win the nomination. Because of what he'd bring to the debate. But he won't win; he can't win. Because he is adamantly against baling out Wall Street. Now why in the hell would they back him?)


Dylan Ratigan - "94% Of The Time The Candidate Raising The Most Money Wins! That's An Auction!" - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lqRyP_Z9qGI)

[trish]

Romney wins. Why?Because the others were total screwballs. Don't deceive yourself, this is about running the guy who has the best chance to win over the independents.


if he gets the nomination he is unlikely to follow through fully on these overheated pre-primary pledges shhhhh spoiler alert.

[onmyknees]

I don't want to hear peoples ideologies but I do want to hear view their interpretations of the results.



Ok fair enough. When you have such diverse personalities and ideologies as Santorum, Romney, Ron Paul, and Newt Gingrich it says to me the R's are far more diverse in terms of opinions than the D's. I don't see how you could argue with that assessment. The rub with such a big umbrella, is that the support diffuses, as we saw in Iowa. The real rub for the R's is do they want a guy who can beat Obama in a general election ( Romney) or do they prefer their ideological soul mate ( either Paul, Newt, Santorum) who can break Barry's knee caps in a debate, but ultimately go down in flames in the general election. Can Romney( who will be the ultimate nominee when the dust settles) put together a coalition strong enough and committed enough to bring all these stray cats into one room, and set their differences aside for the greater good, as they see it. That's the question. It wouldn't surprise me if Axlerod was contributing to Newt's campaign hoping to keep it alive through Super Tuesday !! The election is there for the taking.....but will they hold their nose and grasp the opportunity? Iowa may be a fore shadow of things to come for the R's.

[ed_jaxon]

Wow I am impressed with the insight.

Romney for all intents and purposes won a major victory but 75% of GOP voters still are looking for anyone else. Whether its his religion, positions or his plastic demeanor, there is a reason why the party is looking for someone else.

When will the Repubs put aside their own positions and move forward.

Seems there is a lot of diverse positions but more importantly there are a lost of rigid, dogmatic positions. Politics is about horse trading and compromise. Not a lot of that going on right now in Washington.

I still cannot figure out why Huntsman is getting no traction. I know he did not campaign in Iowa but he damn near finished behind Cain. Just from his damned resume some should support him. Experience in with dealing with China, governing experience and the ability to work across the aisle but not a damned blip on the radar.

[Dino Velvet]

Wow I am impressed with the insight.

Romney for all intents and purposes won a major victory but 75% of GOP voters still are looking for anyone else. Whether its his religion, positions or his plastic demeanor, there is a reason why the party is looking for someone else.


I have goofball relatives in West Texas who are Republican and loathe Obama. But, since Romney "believes in Jesus diff'rent" there's a good chance they give the stink eye to the Mormon and enable Obama. As a more Conservative type, I do worry there might be other pockets in this country where this occurs.

I'd like to hear more from Huntsman too. He scoffed at Romney's endorsement from McCain.

[trish]

But, since Romney "believes in Jesus diff'rent"As I understand it, Mormons do not believe in the "Trinity" and they are polytheist. Jesus is not "The God". It's possible, however, that he's a god or a demigod; i.e. more than a prophet.